General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Killed The Cat
CNN
comments

Comments by "Killed The Cat" (@killedthecat1034) on "Trump changes his story as evidence mounts" video.

@toobmaniac What you seam to have is a confirmation bias. There is plenty that comea out od his own mouth that says different then what you are saying.
4
@blakestillinthegame4248 Preach! 😉✌
4
@toobmaniac Yeah... Sorry... Sweet cheeks... This isn't the Trump WhiteHouse. Just saying things over and over again, does not actually make them true. 😉✌ And if all you have is some late night typos... No wonder you can't form an adult argument that is worth a damn! Really... You should be embarrassed. I can always go back and fix thw typo with the edit button. You using that as any kind of counter... Being an adult... Well... That shame will never leave! 😉✌
4
fran bran He had a foreign country investigate his political opponent. He tried to cover it up, he lied about it, he abused his executive privileges to try and cover it up, he tried to blackmail another country into doing it. Why not get the justice department to look into it, of which he is the head? Why wait till he was running against him? This stuff he has been claiming abput the Biden's has been supposedly going on for a long time. Why wait till now? The timeline went... - puts Ukraine aid on hold - Ukraine president expresses they need more aid on phone call 2days later - the very first thing Trump says after this is, I need a favor. - phone call gets put on server that it would not normally go on and did not qualify for - whistleblower makes report - congress trys to get ahold of report they are legally allowed to have - Trump lies multiple times, on camera, when asked about the money being put on hold. Often times contradicting himself. As he often does. - Trump administration trys to invoke executive privilage - Dem law makers, news media AND rep law makers come out against this - Dem law makers threaten to go to court - Trump finally decides to get "ahead" of the story and releases both the transcript and the report - the report tracks with the transcript. Why would Trump do all that before releasing the transcript and the report if there was nothing to hide?
3
@Lerian_V How does Biden's supposed actions excuse Trump's actions?
3
@irgong6875 If that's what you got out of it, your cherry picking. Why wait until he was running against him? Why try and cover the call up, by lying about it, trying to put it in a different place for more classified material then it would have normally gone in, lying about it and changing his story if he really did nothing wrong? Why would he ask Ukraine to investigate when he is the head of the justice department? If you can't make your argument while considering all relevant material, you need to rethink your argument. When I'm not willing to do is play along with this whataboutism and Trump trying to deflect from his actions. Cuz here's the thing, I personally don't want correct people on my side, being my leaders. If anyone were to ask in an honest way and not just a way that would deflect from Trump's actions, I would say if they had an investigation and by Nana's son ended up being dirty, send their asses to jail, get them out of office, get them away from being in any kind of leadership over me. That however does not detract from trumps curruption and you guys not wanting to deal with that.
3
@Wilma if you think the good over ways to bad when it comes to him, you're simply not paying attention.
3
@Roy Batty I have noticed! 😉✌
3
@Wilma Well... As long as you are making money... 🙄
2
@Wilma SoOoOo... Your swallowing a bunch pf right wing scare tactics? Why do they need fear to convince you... Look at the facts. Illegals.... Your saying that like noone else has done anything abput it. They just choose to do it humanely. I would prefer America not to have the reputation I'm ripping children out of their parents arms, losing them in a system to never see their parents again and stuffing them in cages. There are ways to handle things like this that do not have to involve that. Should illigals be here... No... Do we have to loose our humanity in order to deal with the situation... No. Career polititions... What has he done to combat that? He is being sing right now for profiting from being president by breaking tons of emolument clauses as president. How is that in any way fighting corruption or setting an example? Job growth has been on a steady decline since he became president. The trend of unemployment going down started way back before he even thought about running. You're giving him credit for a five-man relay race. The good did not over come the bad. Before he even ran there was a long history of hiring illigals, racism, sexual assault, curruption, bankruptcy, lying and just down right being a bad guy. In his first year and a half in office he had the house Senate and Whitehouse. He could of gotten the wall funded, healcare fixed and a myriad of other things he promised. All he got was tax cuts for the rich, played a ton of golf and blamed the other half of the country for everything.... Then shut down the gov, had government workers standing at food pantries with their family and losing their homes the longest stretch of time in American history, only two gave and make that worth nothing.
2
@denniswolff7300 What in the world are you talking about, crazy? 🤣 I have been called a lot of thing... Republican has never been one of them. 🤣 I'm a progressive, liberal and a Democrat, you silly silly thing. I have no idea where you got the idea that I was a republican from, but maybe whatever you did get that from you should go back and re-read. Goodness! 🤣
2
@toobmaniac Yeah... Not everybody is that petty, sugar. I have a long history of examples on the Yputube comment section. The only time I have ever even mentioned someone's spelling or grammar is when I literally didn't understand what they were trying to say and needed them to correct it so I could understand what they meant. Not everyone is as petty as you are... Or as desprate to try and make others feel bad. As I said... Its called being an adult. It was a late night typo... Cuz I wrote it... Late night... I remember especially because I have been sick for the past 2 days and have done basiclly nothing but sleeping, resting and feeling like crap. And you are childish... Because instead of presenting a substance based argument, you choose childish insults. If you don't like that label, then you should stop acting in such a manner. Yes... I did say that. I offered verifiable fact, instead of childish insult. Also, I'm not complaining. You could never have that much power over me, sweetheart. I was just point out the difference in our responses. Not sure what you think some Canadian dude has to do with me. 🤷 That kinda falls under the catagory of not my problem. I would actually usually say something to people being bullies, irreguardless of weather the person being bullied agrees with me or not. However... You seam to want to present that same juvenile standard, in reguards to me... For no particular reason. So... You 2 can battle it out on the kids playground, all you like. As for me and proof... You never asked... Because if you had, I would explain to you the proper order of debates. See... You made the original claims. Therefore the onus is on you to prove your claims. Otherwise, you would be asking me to disprove the claims that you have yet to prove. Which makes no sense. So... You prove your claims and... As long as your will agree to conduct yourself as an adult, I would be more then happy to counter your evidence. Though your further need to try and insult me, in order to make yourself feel better about your obvious insecurities, doesn't give me much hope for your adulthood. Though, we shall see, I suppose. 😉✌
2
They don't think it's okay. They are betting it's less criminal. They are trying to help him mitigate the damage at this point.
1
Bear Bear Yeah... Trying to shoot the messanger does not actually make Trump's actions magically disapear.
1
Drew Mitchem You can't come close to qualifying that statement... Or any of the others. Though... I'm guessing you don't care about that.
1
fran bran Lets say all that is true... What part of that makes Trump's actions okay?
1
@irgong6875 Yeah... luckily you're not the one that gets to decide what matters and what doesn't.... Also... Unless you have any proof that things are fabricated... You might as well be screaming into the wind. You Obvy have some conformation bias. When one chooses to ignore all relevant material and only conveniently thinks that the material that is relevant is the one that supports their point of view, they're not being truthful. They want to be right more than they want the truth. If you can't make your argument off of all relevant material, then you have no business making that argument. Why should I care on why or how he waited for? Really? Do you know the details of the Biden thing? That happened a good while ago and conveniently the one time Trump seems to care about it is when he is running against him in a presidential election. As for the Y, you should care because he's trying to unduly influence our Democratic process.... And he's abusing his power to do so. All of which I think you already know, but it doesn't fit what you've decided to be true, so you're playing dumb. What another great example of you only paying attention to the relevant material that fits your preconceived notions. He released efficient information only after lying back and forth a couple of times on camera, trying to hide the phone call itself on a top secret server, to which it did not belong, tried to abuse his executive power to keep Congress from getting the Whistleblower report and then finally only caved because he saw the Republican and Democratic lawmakers getting together and saying hey no that's not cool. He had his own party turn against him on that. If he had nothing to hide and thought he was doing nothing wrong, why do all of that before releasing the information? When did he change his story... Maybe you don't have enough info about the situation to come to a educated opinion on the matter. He denied several times on camera that he put the money for Ukraine on hold. https://youtu.be/4S_x5yI4Q6o https://youtu.be/A0KTdsydt6E https://youtu.be/rnM1H2RYzzU https://youtu.be/4Gc8HGtPDtg To get with Barr for what? That means nothing. What did I say that was not true? Really... Cuz the only reason... Biden is an issue is because Trump is try to divert the attention to Biden and npt his actions. SoOoOo... Yeah... WhatAboutIsm... And your buying into it. Which is not a bog suprise. Considering your bias cherry picking thus far. No... The problem is... Your only willing to look at information that confirms what you want to be true. As evodent by your discribing the "problem" just now. For instance it's not just a Democrat, though that is a good point. It's odd that he's not worried about investigating any Republican corruption. It is his political opponent in the election. Again, another example of you only looking at very specifically tailored information. Runs the justice department. Yet he's going to another country to find out whether Biden did anything shady oh, and only when he becomes his rival candidate in the presidential election, when what he saying happened, happened a long time ago. As for whether Biden is corrupt or not, here's the difference between me and you. I don't want corruption and Liars as my leaders just because they happen to be on the same side that I'm on. If there is enough evidence, there should be an investigation, there should be a trial and if he is found guilty he should go to jail. I would absolutely not make any excuse for his actions. You however cannot say the same.
1
@irgong6875 Lord.... Russia... I have to ask but I'm guess I know the answer... Did you read the Mueller report? If you did, you would know different. Also... Very convenient that when you guys try and dismiss the Russia investigation do you always only talk about the collusion and not the obstruction of justice. Oh look, more cherry picking. Especially since even that is wrong. There was not no evidence of collusion, there was not enough. And that might have a little something to do with the 10 different counts of obstruction of justice for interfering with the conclusion investigation that were in the Mueller report. The story was not originally about biotin. It was about Trump. There's plenty of evidence of all of this which you obviously don't care about because it doesn't support what you've already decided to be true.
1
@Lerian_V SoOoOo... Your a judge? Maybe legal expert? How about constitutional scholar? Are you talking about the DNA that everybody wanted to Fire and? And I mean fired by everybody as in multiple countries? Trump denied holding the money. I said nothing about him denying the investigation. The Giuliani did do that. Seriously, Trump denied any quid pro quo so we're fine carrying the guy who's been caught in countless lies just while being president denied something that he could have done wrong and everything is hunky-dory now? That... that's your argument? Why I can't find anything wrong with that logic. 🙄 Again... Cherry picking info. He withhold American tax dollars in the form of aid, from ukraine, to get him to investigate his political opponent in the next election, instead of getting the justice department, upon which he runs, to do so, he did so only when he became his opponent, he tried to hide this in a multitude of ways and that involved abusing his executive privilege, lying to the American people in charging a story 3 different times on camera, putting the call in a place for top secert material, and did so only when he because an election opponent. There was mention of withholding aid if you know what the aid was for and what it was designated to do. Also knowing about the EU. The Javelins... Is one of the key portions you need to pay attention to. Go look up the Ukraine money for Aid and that history. You'll figure out why him mentioning that was exactly what that was.
1
fran bran Yes... Yes he and the Ukraine president did. You just don't understand the money part. So you dont underatand thw context. No one is saying the very first thing he said was asking for a favor. They're saying that the very first thing he said after the Ukraine president referenced the aid, was ask for a favor. Which is true. Literally, the very first thing out of his mouth after the Ukraine president reference the aid was I need a favor. You're assuming I get my information from the news. You're assuming that the news is wrong. You're making a lot of assumptions. I always double-check the news. They happen to be right here. There is documented evidence of all of this. You cherry-picking is not my problem. Why did the the Ukraine president say there was no pressure? Is that a real question? You expected him to go on International TV and say that he was blackmailed by the president of the United States while standing right beside him and America in the Oval Office? Seriously? While he still needs aid from him? Really? You can't figure that out? I am more concerned about what the current person in power is doing and how he's trying to use this information on Biden as a way to distract from what he did. I'm not willing to play that whataboutism game. I do check my facts. Like I said, you have to make an awful lot of assumptions in order to get where you are. So what you're saying isn't fact.
1
@irgong6875 How didn't I answer your question? There was a whole paragraph on your question about lion how. So you can stop lying on me. I didn't say you didn't get to decide what matters to you. I said you don't get to decide that for everybody. You can just dismiss things all you want, but unless you're in a place to make decisions like that for the people who matter in this situation, it don't matter. Unless you're under the impression I'm trying to convince you of something? Because I'm not. You don't have to prove a damn thing to me or anyone else but you're supposed to be an adult and adults have evidence to back up the claims they make. If you can't do that you either need to get used to not people not caring what you're saying or you need to stop arguing it. Which was the larger amount of time? You say you know the the details of the Biden thing. How long after he decided he was going to run did this phone call happen? And how long before that did he do what Trump is claiming he did with his son? Here's another question, why don't you ever hear him talking to other countries about getting dirt on a Republican or someone who's not running against him in a presidential campaign? " I only pay attention to the material that makes sense" like I said, confirmation bias. Anything that doesn't fit what you've decided to be true you throw up is not making sense. Which is very convenient and it's faulty logic. And it's all the more reason why your opinion should matter. " asking the question why would he do that and then filling in the gaps is exactly the way to back your preconceived notions... I'm not cherry-picking." Except you seem to be doing just that because you're throwing everything aside that doesn't fit what you want it to be as not mattering. That's called cherry picking oh, that's called confirmation bias. You don't have to guess at someone's motives. You're not considering all of the physical facts. Not guessing at someone's motivations, what they are actually doing. Which includes something they did it for a specific reason. Say it this is your fault a logic. It's just laying me. Now you're even trying to put words in my mouth. At what point did I say what about the corrupt Republicans? Please quote me where I said that. This whole thing is just a huge example of you using lazy logic and confirmation bias. whatever doesn't fit... What you decided is true, throw it out the window. That way, what I thought was thrue, can be. And I will assume, lie and put words in your mouth if I have to because I have to be right. I'm barely through your first three paragraphs and you've done that so much then I'm about done. You're just simply not being an honest actor. Not to mention the hypocracy. You literally just got done saying " anything that requires me to guess at someone's motives was Ill take with a grain of salt." But then you wanna guess on my motives.... isn't that convenient.
1
@irgong6875 No.... You asked when did he say, he didn't put the money on hold. I never said anything about he didn't say something about asking about Biden. You pulled that out your ass. Oh.. And did you notice that assumption you just made about me? Yes I said he contradicted himself. I gave you him saying he didn't put the money on hold. I gave it to you from multiple sources and multiple videos. You already know that now he's claiming he did put the money on hold. I'm sorry I wasn't aware I was supposed to spell every single step out to you when you don't give a damn enough to present evidence of your own claims.
1
@irgong6875 you need to stop setting up your own paper Tigers before you start trying to make mine up. I pointed out the assumptions that you made. That's what I did. Just like in this one I just pointed out a bunch more assumptions that you made. It's just confirmation bias left and right and all over town with you. You've already decided you know what it is and you don't care about anything that might contradict that. I'm not sure what the point of continuing is. You do you
1
@Lerian_V Just as soon as you stop making that baseless assumption for the convenience of your argument. I have no idea why you giving me all this stuff on the prosecutor, Joe Biden, John Kerry his son and all the other people you mentioned. I actually haven't given an opinion one way or another on that. Why? Because it's trying to distract from Trump, yet again, trying to use a foreign government to influence a presidential election. As far as all that mess goes... I personally don't want corrupt crazy people on my side of the aisle, representing the leadership of what I believe. So if people are guilty, they need to be tried convicted and sent to prison. I don't give a damn if they have a D in front of their title or not. At the same time, you have to look at the other side and their actions.... Which are not excused by others actions. This stuff with Biden the prosecutor and Biden son happened a while ago. Conveniently Trump only seems to care about it when he becomes his presidential candidate rival. There are about 7 documented arrows pointing to him trying to use American tax dollars, in the form of Aid to force another country to investigate his political rival in the next presidential election. That is messing with our democracy breaking the law to do it and then abusing things like his executive privilege to try and cover it up afterwards. Nothing he died on that side was okay either.
1
@Lerian_V Goodness! It literally came out of his mouth twice in the last 2 weeks. Once in the transcript (Ukraine) and once on live TV (China). Him not being able to stop himself from saying something stupid in public. With Ukraine, the investigation into Biden's son had been opened and 👉CLOSED👈 before Biden ran, yes. Trump wanted it investigated again. Trump asking a foreign government to investigate his political opponent = to get dirt on him = under the law solicitation of a foreign government to interfere in an American election process. That's not even counting the possible bribery and/or blackmail or the abuse of executive powers and possible obstruction. As for the rest... I have already made myself quite clear on shady leaders on my side. I don't ignore laws and excuse their behavior. I don't want those kimds of leaders on my side. If only, you guys, thought the same.
1
@Lerian_V He only did so after He because his political opponent in the election, he tried to hide it, lie about it and now he is trying to spin it. This is not about what I feel is curruption. This is about what the laws of this country says is curruption. Which is apparent when you consider all relevant information.
1
@irgong6875 Yet you say nothing about me quoting you, to prove your lying.... Curious.... Very curious! 😉✌
1
@Lerian_V Okay, then you can prove it then, right? You can prove that the investigation into Joe Biden was reopened before the July 25th phone call? You continuing to say that Trump didn't breach any of American laws does not actually make it true. It doesn't actually make the laws go away. It's also something you and me cannot determine. Most of what he did fell under 👉conflict of interest👈. Upon which, makes him the wrong person to have anything to do with an investigation. Conflict of interest legal statute in Washington State. ..... A conflict of interest exists when a state officer has "an interest, financial or 👉otherwise👈, direct or 👉indirect👈, or engage in a business or 👉transaction👈 or 👉professional activity👈, or 👉incur an obligation of any nature👈, that is in conflict with the proper discharge of the state officer's or state employee's official duties." Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 42.52.020. These are what there is more then enough to indight him with at this point.... campaign finance, bribery, extortion, and obstruction of justice. Though you do bring up a good point about his duty. Which is why it's curious why he did not go to hia own department of justice to handle the investigations and deal with Ukraine. That would have avoided conflict of interest all together. Then he tries to cover it up by putting the recording where it doesn't normally go, attempting to invoke executive privilage, getting his administration to not turn over the report and only caving when his own party turned against him. Why do all that?
1
@irgong6875 and you lied when you said you did not make claims. Which is why I quoted the claims you had made. So that now you can back them up.
1
@irgong6875 I already told you but I will copy and paste them again. 👇 "The details you give are irrelevant or fabricated." That is a claim. A declarative statement. One that you gave nothing to back it up with. " you add material as context your argument that doesn't need to be there" Oh look another declarative statment... With nothing to back it up. " the problem here is you were calling Trump corrupt for asking Ukraine to help in investigating something he seemed to think was suspicious." Oh look, another declarative statement. A claim about me this time. When you can't back up because you're leaving out huge hunks of data when describing what I said and doing so on purpose. Confirmation bias you should really look up this word. You dismiss without any regard for any piece of data that does not fit what you've already decided to be true. " no evidence of colluding with Russia" Oh look, declarative statement number 3226. Absolutely no evidence to back that up. Especially since I know it's a lie because I actually read the Mueller report a couple thousand times.
1
@irgong6875 And you can continue to try and twist what I am saying all you want and ignore what I put forth, when you can't argue aginast it, while claiming that I have confirmation bias all you like. Your simply lying. If you had read the Mueller report you would not claim there is no evidence of collusion.... Which is actually called conspiracy... Btw. There was not enough to make the case but to say none is just a lie. The entire first portion of the 448 page report was dedicated to such. As for obstruction. The entire second portion of the report goes to that. With 10 different cases of such. As for the Ukraine thing... I just layed out all provable facts on the case. No opinions. Simply what we know... And you ignored it. Shocking! 🤣
1
@irgong6875 Here! The Mueller Report. Please, feel free to show me in there where it says that there was "no collusion". And just as a reminder, your looking for conspiracy... And not collusion. Collusion is not a thing under the law. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955118-The-Mueller-Report.html#text/p9
1
@irgong6875 so it doesn't take you to horribly long, you can feel free to just give me the page number. I'll know where you're talkin about. Because I've read it a couple dozen times. You can also feel free to read through the entire thing but I'll give you the page number of the information you're looking for on collusion if you're running short of time, if you want me to?
1
@irgong6875 point 2... Yes it does. You saying that only tells me that you don't understand the ukraine aid money, what its going to, how that works or why the EU was mentioned in the manner that it was. You need to look up the history of the aid going to Ukraine and you will understand how they referance it. Then go back and read the transcript.
1
@irgong6875 The gov definition of top secret is... Top Secret refers to national security information or material which requires the highest degree of protection. The test for assigning Top Secret classification is whether its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.
1
@irgong6875 As for the money on hold... I apparently got that mixed up with him originally denying that he spoke to the Ukraine president about the Biden's. Which I will npw amend my timelike to say that. That was my bad.
1
@irgong6875 The evidence is the held money, the transcript, the administration that would not release the report, documented claim of executive privilages, the second whistleblowers corroboration, the fact that the Whistleblower report has so far been accurate and all they would need is a judge's rulling on whether or not the information on Biden through the investigation that he attempted to get from Ukraine has enough intrinsic value... To indight on everything except obstruction. Under the law, it does not even have to be a complete act. Merely the attempt.... Obstruction would also be covered under he latest actions of holding back witnesses and documents (text message exchange). Except that would spacifically be called obstruction of Congress.
1
@irgong6875 Yeah... Nice try. He had him meet with Giuliani and had him speak with bar. Bar did not open up an investigation in Giuliani does not work for the justice department. If there was an independent investigation opened by the justice department, which then worked with Ukraine to investigate the Biden's, which could of happened.... This would not be an issue. You can keep trying to twist what I'm saying but ita just showing your dishonesty and desperation. It's not a difference in my mind... Its the difference in the law. Again... Conflict of interest.
1
@irgong6875 right... Your going to apologize but at the same time call me Patty. Don't be a child. If you need to rephrase what you said because you were not clear on what you were referring to, then do so. Don't put any of that crap off on me.
1
@irgong6875 This is your claim. You claimed there was no evidence of Collusion. If that is true then it will say as much in the Mueller Report. Which I have given you. You made the claim. The onus is on you to back it up... But I was nice enough to give you the information you need to do so. Your welcome. 😉✌ As for pages... The first but not last reference to the conspiracy is in the intro of volume 1.... Which begins on the cloud doc page 9. On the first few pages after the table of content about volume 1. You will find most of what you need there. For more spacific detail then I suggest you begin on page 36... under Russian hacking and dumping operations.
1
@irgong6875 You said there was "👉No Evidence of Collusion👈". That is spacifically what you said actually.... You can keep trying to move the goal post everytime you get proven wrong... But that doesn't .ean I have to agree with it everytime you do... Or go along with it. Which I will clearly not.
1
@irgong6875 Now are you trying to claim that Trump did not have a conflict of interest in reguards to Biden?
1
@irgong6875 "holy shit really? You thought I meant any claims ever? I was talking about on the subject we were talking about.." That was one of your last comments to me. Your such a silly person.
1
@irgong6875 "I know... I know... It's all me. Everything ia all me. You could not of possibly done anything. Yet I'm the only one here that can say "my bad" about something, without immediately blaming my mistake on the other person, right after. I'm totally the one that needs to be right. I'm totally the one ignoring what the law says, and twisting everything your aaying.... And it is deffinatly me who is moving goal posts! " Your simply not an honest actor. 😉✌
1
@irgong6875 Oh... Look! More vague references to the data I give you from crazy things like legal statutes... And s***... Lol... And why that shouldn't be listened to. Yeah... I get it. You have to attack me because you can't argue the premise effectively. Not a big shocker over here. 🤣
1
@irgong6875 Dude... It it literally one of the biggest stories IN THE WORLD right now. I'm not giving you vague refferences, I'm giving you subject matter to Google. It takes 2 seconds. Will it help if I give you spacific sentences to type into google? Do I need to chew your food for you to? Goggle- all you need to know about the US aid money for Ukraine Google- July 25th Ukraine Phone call Google-Ukraine whistleblower report Or... If you want to cut through all that... Trump impeachment inquiry timeline. .... As a matter of fact... Here! I'll do that one, so you can stop making excuses.... Multiple sources that say basically the same thing. https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/09/trump-ukraine-impeachment-scandal-timeline-key-events?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15707315603709&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fus-news%2F2019%2Foct%2F09%2Ftrump-ukraine-impeachment-scandal-timeline-key-events https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/oct/03/timeline-trump-impeachment-inquiry/ https://amp-usatoday-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/2417517001?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15707315603709&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Famp.usatoday.com%2Famp%2F2417517001%23aoh%3D15707315603709%26referrer%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%26amp_tf%3DFrom%2520%25251%2524s https://qz-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/qz.com/1719034/trump-and-ukraine-the-complete-impeachment-timeline/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15707315603709&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fqz.com%2F1719034%2Ftrump-and-ukraine-the-complete-impeachment-timeline%2Famp%2F%23aoh%3D15707315603709%26referrer%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%26amp_tf%3DFrom%2520%25251%2524s https://www-latimes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-09-26/ukraine-trump-impeachment-inquiry-timeline?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&_amp=true&usqp=mq331AQCKAE%3D#aoh=15707315603709&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fpolitics%2Fstory%2F2019-09-26%2Fukraine-trump-impeachment-inquiry-timeline%3F_amp%3Dtrue%23aoh%3D15707315603709%26referrer%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%26amp_tf%3DFrom%2520%25251%2524s
1
@irgong6875 🤣 Oh! No! You made the claim that there was "No Evidence of Collusion". Though I'm not suprised your lying again. You keep trying to change your story... To hedge your bets.... Then I gave you the Mueller Report AND the pages to look on AND made sure you knew you where looking for conspiracy and not collusion... Basiclly I did chew your food for you with that one... All so YOU can back up YOUR CLAIM that there was " NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION". You have yet to do so. That is because you can't. And the more excuses you make for it... The more you keep trying to get put of backing up your claim... The more Obvy it becomes that you can't. 🤣
1
@irgong6875 Its not my evidence. And the only one being "vague" about anything is you blanket dismissing or dodging what you can't defend against. This is not what I am giving you. It is the facts we know, given the evidence that has been released... And the legal statutes he violated. Like this one... Lol Campaign finance law states: “It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a federal, state, or local election.”
1
@irgong6875 and when am I going to get your proof about no collusion, since I basically spoon-fed it to you?
1
@irgong6875 But that doesn't make any sense. Cuz you sure did sound like you kneq what I was talking about what you qhere trying to excuse what you said and displace the blame on to me when you said this 👉 "holy shit really? You thought I meant any claims ever? I was talking about on the subject we were talking about.."👈. So in which way would you prefer to admit that you are full of shit... In the way that you didn't actually say it, but you were trying to excuse what you said anyways, and put the blame on me... or you did say it and you're lying about that?
1
@irgong6875 You continuing to insist these are my opinions and not just the facts of the situation... Including laws... Are just that. You can't argue the premise. So you keep trying to attack me. You insisting you didn't do thing that you have are equally as silly... But as I have said... I don't have to play along.... And its super Obvy your not answering questions for a reason. Lol
1
@irgong6875 well my opinions aren't nonsense. Neither are legal facts which is what I gave you. Not an opinion... But the actual law. You can keep lying about it but your just making yourself look silly. This is the law... Look it up if you don't believe me. I copied it verbatim... Campaign finance law states: “It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a federal, state, or local election.”
1
@irgong6875 Oh... Your not going through THE and not MY evidence because you can't argue against it. Its just excuses and deflections all day long. Does thia usually work for you with other people? Do they really not catch how full of shit you are... Like right off the bat? 3🤣
1
@irgong6875 Yes... your claim is there isn't any Trump Russia collusion evidence. You also claimed that you have read the Mueller report. Except... I gave you the Mueller report, I gave you the pages you would find it on And basiclly spoon fed you what you needed to prove your claim of no evidence... Yet for some reason... You keep making excuses... Wow! Its almost like your completely full of shit and hoping no one notices! 😉✌
1
@irgong6875 I know... I know... You won't look at any of the facts about Ukraine, you insist the Mueller Report says something and are given what you need to prove it but don't and leta not forget the verbatim law... Which is apparently just my opinion.... Oh and your claims and opinions are not actually claims and opinions but your going to defend them anyways...... But I'm the one who had their mind made up. Closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ear just might actually make facts and law go away. It just makes you really tired from all that dancing you have to do when you're trying to ignore it. Your so silly! 🤣
1
@irgong6875 Lol! Bbbbuuuutttt... You managed to try and justify it. Remember? You tried to put it off on me. You knew what you "said" enough to try and excuse it a little while ago. "holy shit really? You thought I meant any claims ever? I was talking about on the subject we were talking about.." So why where you trying to correct me, about what you actually meant, if you never said it? Even in your excuse, as to why you lied and tried to put what you "said" off on me, you try and put your comments... Your actions off on me... I'm shockes! Tell me... Are you responsible for anything you say or do? 🤣 As I said... Which full of shit are you? I know which one I am. That's why I did it. That's why I do that with people like you. It's a super easy way to trap you guys into showing your true face. 😁 I mean I can tell you what kind of full of shit you are.... If ya want. 😁 Your the kind that just proved that you would act like you know what your talking about, so you can blame other people, to distract from the substance at hand. 😁 And you just got caught... Which is why you are desperately trying to ignore it. 😉✌
1
@irgong6875 And now... At least for the past day and a half... Your trying to ignore the substance based questions I have been asking as well.... BTW, No One Believes anyone on here when they say they're not going to read the rest of the comments. We know you read the rest of the comments. All that's doing is showing you being more full of s***. You just have nothing to argue back with! So thainks for that! 😉✌
1
@irgong6875 As for the rest... You can ignore it, insist they are merely my opinions and not actual facts (including word for word readings of the law🤣) and you can keep insisting everything that I do, you do and apparently Trump does is all my fault... But... Along with unveiling your silly tactics... I'm going to keep asking you the substance based questions you keep trying to ignore and you can keep ignoring them. Cuz, that's basiclly the answer anyways! 😁
1
@irgong6875 The Mueller Report.... You claimed there was no collusion evidence, including in the Mueller Report. I ... -Gave you the Report - Told you on what pages you can find the summary of what your looking for to prove or disprove your claims - I also told you where to start reading in order to get a more detailed account of it, to prove or disprove your claims - I told you that you are looking for conspiracy and not collusion, sense collusion isn't a thing under the law and so you don't get confused - NOW I will even give you some ear markers to be watching out for in terms of conspiracy, which is going to make it even easier for you to prove or disprove your claim... *Trump Tower Meeting- Start on page 110 of volume 1 *The IRA- Start on page 33 of volume 1 *Theft of DNC Docs - Start on page 40 of volume 1 *Trump Tower Moscow- Start on page 67 of volume 1 *Trumps letter of intent- Start on page 70 of volume 1 *Michael Cohen and Trump travel to Russia- start on page 76 of volume 1 * George Papadopoulos - Start on page 80 of volume 1 *Clinton Emails- - Start on page 86 of volume 1 * Contacts with Ambassador kolinsky start on page 127 of volume 1 There is more... But that is more then enough to show you! 😁 Oh and here is the Mueller report, yet again... So you don't even have to bother scrolling up to find the link again... https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955118-The-Mueller-Report.html#text/p9 Now... I have done everything for you except use your own brain and eyeballs to read for yourself. And I bet you don't do it for the 6th time now. 😁
1
@irgong6875 This is the law... Look it up if you don't believe me. I copied it verbatim... Campaign finance law states: “It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a federal, state, or local election.” All that would be needed to prosecute, if he was not president and could be charged, would be, a judge's ruling on the value of the information from Ukraine. He would not even have to recieve the info. Just attempt to solicit it. Also... What the LAW SAYS and NOT ME! 😉✌
1
@irgong6875 Now are you trying to claim that Trump did not have a conflict of interest in reguards to Biden?
1
I've taken to just finding and reading transcript of what he has said, most of the time. Cuz... Omg!
1
Bob Smith Really "Bob Smith" with no pic... Lol
1
@uberuaway6669 How does Biden's actions detract from Trump's?
1
@ryano.8768 Goodness! Okay, we can take that theory for a little walk. Lets assume that all the sudden engaging with a foreign governments to get dirt on your political opponent during campaign is not illegal... Tell me, why did he then - put the recording of the call in a place for top secret info, that it would not of normally gone in - lie and flip flop back and forth about putting the money on hold - try to get his administration to not release the whistleblowers report to congress, going so far as to try and claim executive privilege to do so - and only finally releasing the information to Congress, that was always there legal right to have, HIS OWN PARTY got together and turned against him on that.. Why would he have done all that if it was perfectly fine for him to do so?
1
@ryano.8768 Boy... Please 🤣
1
@nope007_ And... why are you assuming that total strangers get all their factual information from CNN? Or that they don't check their sources? Is it because it's easier to give a blanket statement to people who are presenting substance, when you don't have any? Or do you really think that because we're commenting in a YouTube comment section, that means we must get all our information from CNN? Because, if that's true, then wouldn't that mean that you get all yours from CNN, as well? 😁✌
1
@toobmaniac And now we know how far from actual reality you really are. The Russia investigation... Really? So when you read what I said and then repeated, that just saying things over and over again doesn't actually make it true, you didn't really understand that, did you? You have npt read the Mueller report, obviously. Cuz, you clearly have no clue what it actually said. Also... Apparently the details with Ukraine. The more you speak... the more evident it becomes that you don't know what you're talkin about. I would suggest you stop but I'm not sure you're smart enough to stop when you're dramatically behind. So I guess continue to repeat your unsubstantiated lies until you either wear yourself out or they magically become true. Have fun with that! 😉✌
1
@toobmaniac So... here's the problem with your theory and veiled excuse. The top of this thread that you chose to write under is about Trump and all his lies. I don't have a problem with evolving the subject. I do have a problem with devolving it. Detraction and using whataboutism in order to deflect from his own actions would qualify as devolving. At the very least you could have done was addressed the main subject and then try to move on. You chose not to do that. Which means you're not interested in discussing the premise. You're interested in pointing nine different other directions in order to not have to. This is going to sound a bit biased but if nobody is stupid enough to believe something that said repeatedly, Trump wouldn't be president right now. In almost every subject he covers, once you get into the details, and I mean all the details and not just what fits your premise, most of what he has done and promised to do, falls apart. Like... Even the stuff he has a point on. In his first year and a half where he could have gotten like all this stuff done, when he had the house the Senate and the White House.... all he managed to do was tax cuts. Only he made the tax cuts for the wrench permanent and put a clock on the ones for the middle class. He had a more than decent point about China and intellectual property rights and then messed it up by assuming that he could play strongman tactics with a country that is basically the best in the world at playing the long game. The only thing I can really get behind that he has done, is Criminal Justice Reform. Which was also bipartisan. Which meant for One Shining Moment everybody pulled their heads out of their asses for 2 seconds and got something done. Actually, I just thought of another. Funding the Special Olympics. His education secretary, who had never been in a public school in her entire life, tried to cut funding for Special Olympics. Now I could get on him about hiring her in the first place but in reality there's no way he could have known that she was going to do that and when he saw she did he made her take it back. In other words... I don't have the blinfing hate... Dem BS... You guys like to put on us. I just like having all relevant information about a subject so I can make an educated opinion on it. When you Institute that train of thought into so much of what he has done, it doesn't look good for him. And I don't know what the hell kind of straw man you're trying to set up right now with the premise and all of that but... whatever dude. You're trying to act like you have knowledge and that it wasn't just silly juvenile BS you were trying to do with grammar and spelling and then throwing in a couple of lies about the Mueller report. There's a difference between knowledge and fact. Facts come from all the knowledge on one subject. Not just cherry-picked craziness. All that is called is confirmation bias. In other words you think you out and pay attention to only what support what you've already decided to be true. which also has a lot to do with how people can believe something if it's repeated enough. You know what else doesn't work, shooting the messenger. Occam's razor applies here. The media, the Democratic Party and a whole lot more Independence then y'all like to admit, keep going after Trump. You are correct on that. Occam's razor comes in to play when you guys can understand why that keeps happening. you guys like the gloss over the fact that they're going after him because he did something and because he keeps doing things and because there was plenty of Rock Solid information showing that he did these things. It's just lazy thinking to stop your conclusion before getting to that. they're going after him for a moment's Clauses because there's documented evidence of him violating the laws of emoluments. Again Occam's razor. they're going after him for paying off pornstars with campaign money because he paid off pornstars with campaign money. Again Occam's razor. they went after him for collusion with Russia because there was evidence of him colluding with Russia. Again Occam's razor. They went after him for obstruction of justice because there's 10 clearly laid out cases for obstruction of justice which he committed during the conclusion portion of the investigation. Again Occam's razor. People call him crazy and unstable because he acts crazy and unstable. One of the most recent examples of this is when he called himself "the chosen one". You can't make that s*** up dude. Again Occam's razor. Ask for being scratched by anything, why do you think you want so desperately to win in 2020. Because if he doesn't he's going to be going to jail. If he does the clock run out by the time he gets done with the next 4 years on most of the crimes they found. Until then, his office protect him from prosecution. another thing laid out in the Mueller report. More popular? Show proof. if they're all lies against an honest man than you will have no problem proving they are lies. So unless you're just trying to repeat something enough times to make yourself believe it, you're not saying anything unless you give me proof. His time even before becoming president disproves him being "an honest man". And this is why you shouldn't make assumptions about people you don't know. not only have I read it, I've read it a multitude of times. If you would like to test that then you can ask me any damn question about it you would like and I will give you the paragraph and page number for the information. Infact... Here is a copy. So you can find something to ask. Like I said... Not everyone is like you. I make sure I can back up what I say before I say it. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955118-The-Mueller-Report.html#text/p9 Mueller did lay it out in no uncertain terms. You laid out 10 counts of obstruction of justice in great detail with documented and witness evidence to back it up. Which you would know if you would read the Mueller report. even back then, they could not have used it to impeach him because of the Senate. The Senate won't vote to impeach. See, this is a silliness I'm talking about. At the beginning of this paragraph you openly admitted that you would not read the Mueller report" but you still for some reason feel confident enough to say that "absolutely nothing and it has any legal ramifications of any sort to justify an impeachment inquiry." In other words , you made a statement you have willingly admitted that you cannot qualify. And now it's a big conspiracy with the Democratic party and the whistleblowers. I say again, qualify your statements. Don't throw a bunch of BS conspiracy theories out there with absolutely nothing to back them up. if your reality fit the facts then you would be able to back up what you are saying with actual evidence. You have not and therefore they have not. In order to dabate something you would first have to come with actual provable facts. You have shown non thus far. Do that and then we will talk. Simply calling things facts does not actually make them facts. All you have done is prove that you have swallowed a bunch of bias right wing talking points whole, without bothering to do your due diligence.
1